About your Search

20120925
20121003
STATION
FOXNEWS 47
CNN 21
CNNW 21
MSNBCW 10
MSNBC 9
FBC 7
CNBC 3
KNTV (NBC) 3
CSPAN 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
WBFF (FOX) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 178
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 178 (some duplicates have been removed)
that susan rice, america's ambassador to the u.n., provide more answers what happened in benghazi. new hampshire senator, kelly ayotte one of those four senators who sent a scathing letter to ambassador susan rice, she will be here to tell us first-hand what that is all about. bill: meantime the violence in syria getting worse by the day. a pair of massive explosions rocking the capital city of damascus. just watch here. that looks like surveillance video there. state television saying that rebel fighters attacked a militariry compound. one of a series of increasingly bold attacks in their efforts to out of president assad. the car bombs shown here shattering windows. they could be heard from miles around. a three-hour gunfight followed. four syrian guards and an iranian tv reporter reportedly killed as a result of that. martha: all right. let's take it back here at home for a minute and talk a little bit about the economy because we've got a lot of new numbers that have come in that are giving us a better read on the health of the u.s. economy. u.s. weekly jobless claims fell by 26,00
at the state department, that the u.s. ambassador susan rice made on five sunday talk shows here in the united states. they're making this a big issue. does it have political legs as they say? >> well, first of all, i wouldn't be surprised the romney administration -- i mean the romney team make hay out of anything. look, they're looking for an issue. and they're the last people that we should hear from on foreign policy given all of the missteps that mitt romney has made. but look, wolf, beyond the political nature of this whole inquiry, we need to look at the fact that al qaeda leaders posted a video a day before the attack on september 10th which mr. alvarez wa ri wanted to avenge the death of one of his deputies in libya. he called upon libyans to, you know, try to provoke unrest. so look i think one of the things we should do right now is to let congress -- members of congress investigate this. they will investigate this. senator kerry along with senator has sent a letter to the administration answering very important questions that i think the american people will want to know. on the sh
attack. hillary clinton knew. susan rice knew and she went on national tv saying otherwise. president obama may well have known and we ask tonight why shouldent susan rice resign and why shouldn't hillary clinton resign and why doesn't the buck stop with obama himself? this evening, with 1.3% gdp collapsing business investment and a contraction in chicago fed manufacturing, our question is, is this a stall speed speed recovery or are the signs out there that we are going back in to recession? in in addition, want a clue to what balm's patriotic policies are? look at a france. today france instituted a 75% tax rate for millions. more taxes and spending is coming here and i will show you how. first up, 17 days since our ambassador and three american heros were murdered by terrorists in benghazi. the obama white house is chajing their story again tonight. listen to what susan rice told the sunday shows two weeks ago, that a was five days after the attack. >> what happened in benghazi is in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had transpired hours before in cairo. >> w
that when susan rice was sent out to tell us it was in response to a video and just a spontaneous act. what, please put this in perspective for us. >> well, let's have the most generous interpretation possible for this administration. when eli lake broke the story, why i think it is wrong, this is only explanation possible. when eli lake broke the story. megyn: "daily beast". >> yeah for "the daily beast", soon after the attack we had a pretty good bead on some of the individuals involved in the attack. another one said we had two kinds of intelligence on one guy. we believe we had enough to target him. these guys have return address, camps people and variety of things we could do. if you had intelligence about a possible terrorist attack would make sense not to tip off al qaeda that we knew so we could have element of surprise if we wanted to respond to it. the problem with that is, one we didn't respond. it has been 17 days and there have been no drone strikes on al qaeda camps or, return address hasn't been hit anywhere. two, there is difference w hole holding intelligence and lying abou
to the united nations susan rice, to resign because of the comments she made on those five sunday talk shows? >> yes, wolf. i believe that this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership, such a misstatement of facts at the time and for her to go on all of those shows and in effect the spokesman for the world and be misinforming the american people and our allies and countries around the world, to me somebody has to pay the price for this. we have too much things go wrong and everyone forgets about it the next day. i think we have to send a clear message. on such an issue where an american ambassador was killed where by all the evidence at the time the presumption had to be it was terrorism. i can see why if they wanted to say - it was intentionally or unintly and to show the significance of that, i believe she should gn, yes. >> because there is statemt that the pokesperson, the director of public affairs for the offif director of national intelligence put out today they et w obviously arist -- a action, delibete and organized terrorist assault carried out by extres affili
saying the administration's response was inept and ignorant and susan rice blaming it on a spontaneous protest was inexcusable. >> it's either willful ignorance or abysmal ignorance to think people come to spontaneous demonstrations with mortars and heavy weapons pant attack goes on for hours. bill: both sides are complaining. governor romney's team says the white house is still getting its story mixed up. >> reporter: democrats say republicans are politicizing the tragic attack that cost of life of four americans. the republicans say the white house is cover ugging up the details for political reasons. here is axlerod. >> the president called it an act of terror the day after it happened. but when you are the responsible party, when you are the administration and you have a responsibility to act on what you know and what the intelligence community believed. >> reporter: actually it was several days after the benghazi attack before the white house called it terrorism and that came after the national terrorism chief called it aterror attack. >> i think now based on the recommendations o
. then the explanations began to shift a little bit. susan rice the u.n. ambassador said it started as a demonstration about that video, and then involved other elements, who joined spontaneously. it's been shifting ever since. the president initially called it an act of terror. he has not done so since then but his spokesman has said since then that it is obviously self-evidently an act of terror, and now this statement from the spokesman for the director of national intelligence, who says in part, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to, al qaeda. >> can i ask you, susan rice, she's under fire from peter king. of course he's a republican congressman. he's been calling for her resignation, saying she hasn't been forthcoming with the truth. so what does the white house say about that? >> they did put out a spokesman in defense of ambassador -- statement in defense of ambassador susan rice yesterday. it stems from a couple of sundays ago. she was on some of the sunday shows, including "meet the press" where she gave that explanation that this pr
that ambassador susan rice should resign because of her statement. >>> all right, we want to turn to andrea mitchell, chief foreign correspondent, and andrea how rare is it for the intelligence committee to come out and acknowledge they got it wrong initially, and is it having any effect on the response here? >> reporter: well, first of all it is very, very rare for them to make this type of admission. and politics are clearly in play. the questions are being asked, why did they get it wrong? was it because of a coverup, or was it because they were trying to avoid acknowledging mistakes this close to the election? so there is always a political consequence, and certainly's tonight, the white house is strongly defending susan rice, but she is in the cross-hairs of the political argument and that will be pursued by the republicans who have been hammering away for days saying that the administration deliberately covered up. something the white houses strongly denying. >>> all right, andrea mitchell, thank you, we want to let you know about a special broadcast in the works for monday. brian wil
susan rice is programmed to say this was a spontaneous event, not premeditated or preplanned. those were utter falsehoods. i won't say they were lying but some briefed them and told them to say this when the intelligence agencies found out 24 hours later and fox news reported 24 hours after the event this was a preplanned terrorist attack. who programmed carney. who programmed susan rice? she only has one superior, that is secretary of state. carney has three superiors, chief of staff and head in sa and president of united states. i think you have a conspiracy to get by the administration and to make sure that no one says there has been attacks during barack obama's tenure. what gets me, the top intelligence committee comes out oh, yeah, this was a preplanned terrorist attack. we spent $60 million for these folks. are you telling me they just learned this? where it gets to the media, back in the nixon days, they would have been all over this from day one following it up. these folks, many of them, not all of them and not all on the left, they are in the tank for barack obama culturally,
way beyond what is in the document specifically the statements of susan rice that spun the story that was hijacked by extremists and then launched an assault. we're going to look back on the period and original reporting as really changing the dialogue publicly about this attack. we reported a day after the assault based on an interview with the head of the house intelligence committee in was premeditated commando style attack. then with my colleagues pamela brown, on the 17th after the ambassador wrote his comments, we reported there was no demonstration at consulate when the attack happened. then my colleague bret baier was the first to report that a guantanamo detainees was suspected of having a role into that attack. you make a good point. we've had three terrorist attacks on the obama administration's watch yet they have failed to call them as such or delayed in their branding as such. fort hood where i've done an extensive investigation, how can they brand that as workplace violence. it's just dishonest to if i could take my reporter's hat on for a moment. >> that what some
. it was obvious it was a terrorist attack before susan rice came on this show and others saying oh, no, it was a spontaneous attack about a video. it turns out al-qaeda is capable or al-qaeda affiliates are capable of launching terrorist aattackeds on american embassies and in this case quite a sophisticated one. and attacks on the day after in sudan and tunisia and yemen. we have a war going on and the president doesn't want to discuss that so they tried to pretent this was a spontaneous reaction to a video. >> chris: the timeline set out was that we have this early information and then got information that changed. before susan rice did her famous round of five interviews including "fox news sunday" that first sunday after the attack there was a lot of information or at least allegations including the president of libya and i specifically asked her about that who said this was a preplanned terrorist attack and yet they were insisting. she was insisting no, it was spontaneous. >> it was amazing. i think i was on the panel that week and we were all surprised she didn't leave a little m
that happened. then compare that to susan rice's tour on the five network shows that sunday which was five days later. have you thought about that? >> i know it's fashionable to call for susan rice's resignation. i think that's missing the target. the target is the president. the president sets the ideological tone and celts the message and for home it was politically and philosophically convenient to say it was caused by a movie trailer and it was spontaneous. to admit otherwise is to admit al qaeda is not on the run. it can carely out terrorist attacks. bill: on the time line it will tell you whether there was a considered effort to deflect or specificallien extra detective. >> the time line is less important than the bigger picture. the bigger picture is a collapsing policy in the region. that's not important simply because of november. it's important for the next four years. because this world view that's so divorced from reality events you from having an effective policy. if you can't recognize reality you can't deal with it. i almost prefer the coverup explanation would be true. because t
it gets susan rice off the hook. peter king is calling for her to resign. does that get her off the hook for coming out five days after this happened on five different sunday shows and saying this was spontaneous protest related to this film. i don't think so. we all know what james clapper's office said. we know that they have been evolving on this. but it took five days. >> not only that what she said was unequivocal. why not just say the safest thing that all administration say when they don't want to release information which is the investigation is continuing. we don't have all the information. >> why jump to the conclusion that this is about a film and each at the president's u.n. speech this week he highlighted this film through throughout this u.n. speech leading many to believe that the main issue is this youtube clip that seems relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of siblings charles krauthammer also had a similar take on this and he responded to that james clapper statement last night. take a listen. >> well, you read the dni -- dnr statement it's a cover your rump sta
to resign. susan rice facing mounting criticism for statements she made following the deadly attack on the consulate in benghazi, peter king becoming the highest ranking lawmaker to call for her to step down. and congressman king making his case moments ago here on fox news channel. >> if ambassador rice was deliberately misleading the american people and showed a lack of knowledge and sophistication, she shouldn't hold that. the entire administration is wrong and this is the american people, and the world, and she was as spokeswoman, our representative to the world and explaining what happened and virtually everything she said was wrong. >> kelly: with that, we welcome you to a brand new hour of america's election headquarters, i'm kelly wright. >> i'm jamie colby, an interesting new twist to the whole story, congressman king joins a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were ki
something as terror and send ambassador susan rice to so many talk shows days later to claim was spontaneous? >> it does appear there was a cover-up. there are many reporters asking questions. you are told what she was operating on best information she had and she was couching it as most recent information. she was specific and she was so specific but it was contrary to common sense. there is no -- to compare to what happened in cairo and movie caused it. protestors usually don't have mortars and things like that. media had a disturbing lack of curiosity about this and holding their feet to the fire. >> there is also another element the 24/7 news cycle the desire to get something out to the public arena quickly often brings mistakes like this. think of colin powell and the demonstration at the u.n. supposedly of wmd's in iraq. he was talking about what he thought at the time was true. it may or may not have turned out to be true and the stuff may have gone to syria. this the function of the news cycle. >> the statement months in preparation, colin powell. this was the opposite. they were try
, it was a terrorist attack and leon panetta said it was obviously an attack, before susan rice said it was a spontaneous protest about a video and the president has a big investment in the narrative, is usama bin laden dead an al-queda finished and, it turns out al qaeda and affiliates, al-sharia are capable of launching sophisticated terrorist attacks, and, the day and day after in sudan and tunisia and yemen and we have a war on terror going on and the president doesn't want to discuss that and i tried to pretend it was a spontaneous reaction to a video. >> chris: the timeline that the d. n. i., department of national in -- director of national intelligence and panetta said, we have early information and then got information that changed but, before susan rice did the famous round of five interviews including fox news sunday, the first sunday after the attack there was a lot of information released, allegation including the president of libya and i specifically asked about that and i said it was a pre-planned terrorist attack and yet, they were insisting, she was, no, it was spont
is the united nations susan rice. almost two weeks ago she claimed the assault was a spontaneous protest that spun out of control. white house officials admitting it was a coordinated terrorist attack. speaking earlier on fox news, peter king says rice should step down over this. >> the person that was out there. the person that was going to get all the glory, all the morning shows was ambassador rice. to send a clear message to the world and to american people this will not be tolerated, she should resign but also should investigate and find out how high up this went. >> gregg: welcome to a brand-new hour. i'm gregg jarrett. >> heather: i'm heather childers. a new debate rages in washington. what did white house officials know and when did they know it. demand for answers into the shifting accounts coming not just from republicans but lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. attack in benghazi that left four americans dead, including chris stevens, ambassador to libya. molly henneberg is live in washington. >> molly: the white house and state department are defending ambassador susan ric
to the united nations susan rice went on the talk shows it was a chest - orchesterated line. within 24 hours they knew it was a terrorist attack and how did they know that? they have to classify it as a terrorist attack to get the right people in action to go in investigate. that had happened. >> brian: there is a couple of problems with it 24 hours after the attacks we knew, there was intelligence knew. whether ambassador rice or president obama knew. i would have to assume they did know. they went everywhere saying we had no idea and blamed the movie. hilary clinton blamed the movie three times in the after math and jay carny blay amed the movie and president obama in the un podium mentioned the mouvy and not being -- being part of the reason for the killings. charles has a summary. let's listen to them. >> why did they deceive? it is obvious. the attack tock place five days after the democrats had spent ape week in charlotte spiking the football on osama and the only foreign policy achievement of four years they repeated it over and over. and great triumph and then al-qaida sacks the emba
called for the resignation of u.n. ambassador susan rice who proposed the attack was the result of the youtube video. king called rice's exnags a misstatement of facts i believe she should resign and while john mccain disagreed about the need for rice to be sfirds he made it clear that the attack had been bungled by the white house. >> that doesn't pass the smell test. willful ignorance or abysmal intelligence. >> mitt romney criticized the foreign policy in "the wall street journal" editorial pages he wrote -- romney plans to deliver a major foreign policy address some time after this week's debate. joining us now from washington, is p.j. crowley, former assistant secretary of state for public affairs. it is always great to see you. you always help us make sense of these senseless moments. i guess your -- where do you grade the administration on -- in terms of handling the affairs in benghazi? we know it's a fluid situation. there's been a lot of critique on both sides of the aisle i would say about how precise the white house has been or hasn't been given the information that
.s. government response has frankly been confusing. u.n. ambassador susan rice has said the attacks were not preplanned. secretary clinton said she had absolutely no information or reason to believe there is any basis to suggest that the u.s. ambassador was on an al qaeda hit list as a target. the state department said u.s. officials at that post never passed along the warning from the libyan government on militias and security in benghazi. now the administration appears to be backtracking a little bit, at least on the assertion about whether the attack was preplanned or not. but the take-away right now from the administration, when you take a step back and look at this information and the conflicts in the information, appears to be this. the americans on the ground failed to tell washington about the risks, so it isn't the state department's fault that they didn't stop it. well, why so much confusion? chris coons is on the senate foreign relations committee, he has been briefed on the situation. and first, sir, thank you very much for taking the time. let me start and ask you, since i k
it was a terror attack 24 hours after the incident. now some senators are demanding ambassador susan rice say why, she said it wasn't. what did the white house know and when did it know it? >>> plus, a new survey from ceos, does the pessimism spell trouble for president obama and maybe the rest of us also? president obama and mitt romney meanwhile battling it out in the swing state of ohio. john harwood joins us now with all the details. good evening, john. >> good evening, larry. you know, in the wake of that 47% video last week, mitt romney's got a new message and that's to tell middle class people as well as the poor that he cares about them. he did it on the stump in ohio today, he also did it in an interview with our nbc colleague ron allen just a few minutes ago. here's mitt romney. >> i served as a pastor of a congregation with people of all different backgrounds and economic circumstances that i care very deeply about the american people and people of different socioeconomic circumstances. and i think throughout this campaign, as well, we've talked about my record in massachusetts. don't
of ambassador susan rice who spun the story this was an administration that was hijacked by extremists and then they launched the assault. and i think we're going to look back on this period and see the original enterprise reporting by fox news channel as really changing the dialog publicly, about this attack. we reported a day after the assault, based on an interview out of the house intelligence committee, that this was a pre-meditated commando steel attack and along with my producer pamela brown on the 17th day after ambassador rice's comments, there were know he demonstrations at the consulate when it happened and bret baier was the first to say a guantanamo bay detainee with the attacks. you made a good point. three terrorist attacks on the obama administration's watch and failed this to call them as such or delayed in their branding them as such and in fort hood i've done an extensive investigation, how can the defense department brand that or dealing with it as work place violence. it's just dishonest if i could take my reporters hat off. >> mike: i don't know how you could have
about what the u.s. knew. eli, you have been investigating whether susan rice, the u.n. ambassador, was, in addition to receiving the talking points, obviously now everyone knows what those included, right, including that it was not a preplanned attack, also had perhaps been briefed on classified information, which could have included different pieces of information, obviously. what have you found? >> well, the main thing to understand is that the key piece of intelligence that informed the unclassified assessment that this was a spontaneous reaction to a video protest was an intercept between a member of ansar al sharia, and alk al qae in north africa. so that fact that it comes from that conversation, there are lots of reasons as to why the intelligence community would not want that information to be out there. one would compromise sources. the other is this there is a risk if you name groups like that, you could be creating a situation where you're getting false confirmation. someone may have seen a report to that effect, and you think it's an independent verification when it's just
-called talking points you've heard so much about. the talking points that ambassador susan rice used on sunday talk shows that emphasized an initial assessment that the attack began as a spontaneous protest, that it didn't appear to be planned. the white house's national security council spokesman tommy vetoer tells cnn the white house was not involved in writing that memo. elise, i know you have been working fast and furious on this. what was the memo, and what did it say? >> erin, what senior administration officials are telling us, they are speaking from unclassified talking parts provided by the intelligence community based on preliminary intelligence assessments, which were used in the briefing members of congress and speaking about it publicly. now, we know, as you said, there was other information reporting from our sources saying there were indications of possible terror involvement. but national security council spokesman tommy see tore says they didn't have that information and in a statement he says this was an intelligence community assessment based on the analysis of all of the av
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 178 (some duplicates have been removed)